I'm confused as to what the unmodified bill is even for? Why do you need an additional law saying ammo purchased instate can be shipped to you, when you can already have ammo shipped to you if you live outside of Cook County?

Gov. Quinn says that he is a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but then does something like this.

He has said before that "There is no place in the state of Illinois for weapons designed to rapidly fire at human targets at close range,"

Which strikes me as completely odd that he wants to impose more legislation on gun owners saying that it's for the good of the people of IL, and that the people of IL are not safe. I think he really means the people of Chicago.

Chicago already has similar laws in place and has about a 30% increase in murder rates from about this time last year.

As I understand the original bill(Before Quinn replaced the entire bill with his AWB) clarified some legalese so it is CLEAR that someone from Illinois can buy ammo online from a seller outside Illinois but also from seller INSIDE Illinois. I believe the way its worded now "technically' you can only buy ammo online/through the mail from an out of state seller. Not that it stops anyone, I buy ammo from a dealer in Southern Illinois all the time..

This AWB is basically word for word an AWB that a Democratic rep from Chicago has been pushing for a while but that did not have anywhere near the votes to even come up for a vote this legislative session. On the one hand the likelihood of this passing is slim...on the other this is Illinois, god knows what kind of back room deals are going on right, god knows who has dirt on who so anything CAN happen in the world of Chicago style politics.

Scary stuff there. He even included the old "semi-automatic version of a fully automatic pistol"...I'm still wondering if that applies to Glocks and Berettas. A felony for possession of a high-cap magazine? Ouch.

__________________
The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. -James Burgh

Under the amendatory veto power, a governor may return a bill with specific recommendations for change, which lawmakers can accept by majority votes in each chamber or can over- ride with three-fifths majorities. If legislators do neither, the bill is dead.

Despite the speaker’s distaste for the practice, over the last two decades, lawmakers have accepted governors’ changes more than two-thirds of the time, and overridden only about 6 percent of the amenda-tory vetoes. In the remainder of the cases — about a quarter of the total — the underlying bills have died.

Curious, do you have a reference that E. authored the AWB - it was quite awhile ago? I recall Biden saying that he was primo.

Uh, i wrote the wrong thing: Authored is not the right word. Rahm Emanuel was the Senior Advisor to the President for Polical Strategy. Senator Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ) claimed that Rahm Emanuel and Dennis Burke were the driving force behind passage of the 1994 "assault weapons" ban.*

The so called "assault weapons" ban was a very small part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act which contained 33 titles. Beginning in 1989 there were about 15 "assault weapons" bans proposed in congress. i'm not sure who proposed the version of the AWB that became law. Rahm Emanuel and Dennis Burke may have had input into language of the AWB.

*Burke was the federal prosecutor for AZ who approved Fast and Furious.

According to our NRA lobbyist Quinn's proposal has virtually no chance of moving forward.

Legislative Update 8/1/12

Well just about the time you don’t think there are any more stunts to be pulled, and that all the grandstanding was going to be done in Washington, we get this stunt here in Illinois.

The Governor took a bill to clean up ammo sales that we proposed, and passed, and used his Amendatory Veto authority to gut the bill and re-write it to be the City of Chicago’s semi-auto ban.

We have seen this language before and it didn’t have the votes to pass then, and it doesn’t have the votes to pass no in our opinion. In fact, we control the legislation. Since it is our bill to begin with, we picked the sponsors for the bill, people who generally believe like we do. So we control the bill from the stand point of if the veto message even gets called.

The procedure is for the sponsor of the bill to file a motion to either accept or reject the Governor’s action. Since we have no intention of accepting them, the only options then are to either move to override the veto, or not call the motions for a vote.

Either way, the semi-auto ban has no way of becoming law. For other reasons, I won’t go into all of our other issues or scenarios, and possibilities. There is a lot going on right now, but we are still in the driver’s seat and even if the Governor wanted to call a special session on guns, he won’t beat us.

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.